Do you enjoy watching this movie?

as a whole, probably not.

Yes, it's my favorite movie of all time

I only really enjoy the 'Dawn of Man' sequence. The rest is kind of draggy.

Forget culture, meaning, technique, cinematography etc.
No problem, except maybe the "etc."... cuz that covers a lot of territory. I've seen the film in theaters four or five times and on HD video often... I enjoy it completely, sometimes I think of the larger story, the way Clarke envisioned it in the novel and even the early versions which I know from Lost Worlds of 2001 and later books on the making of the film. Sometimes I think about the ramifications of every element... What's going on day to day on that space station? How about the Soviet Lunar city? How many moon buses are zipping around on the moon? How many countries and corporations have a foothold in space? How many clues does HAL drop that something is awry?
Sometimes I just go with it. The environment is immersive and believable and the story, while open to interpretation, is both awe inspiring and somewhat disturbing, with echoes of "Childhoods End".

2010, the sequel film, was better.

I enjoyed the book much better but I appreciate many of the groundbreaking scenes in 2001. The only thing about 2001 is the author of the book, there is a lot of evidence that Arthur C. Clarke lived in Sri Lanka because he was a pedophile and he could get away with it there.

Kubrick with this film perfectly demonstrated the true meaning of cinema for me, which means the director is staying out of the way as much as possible, leaving a lot of space to the imagination of the viewer, viewers are co-authors of the film. The best films for me do that, avoiding specificity, less showing and explaining the better the film, rarity perhaps in todays commercial cinema, with all the backstories, exposition, and details on everything what's happening, the audience ends up numb from all the informational overload. Kurosawa is another director very good at the non-specificity approach towards open space or vagueness in cinema, the same Tsui Hark, Paul Thomas Anderson, Luis Bunuel, Mikhalkov, Konchalovsky, Polanski, Truffaut, etc... They often rely on the viewer's contribution to finish the films in their head. Whereas on the other side I find Hickcock's films probably very easy for modern viewers who love more details handed to them.

Yes